5 ms·

What a load of rubbish. I suspect that the author has a very highly opinion of his intelligence and failed Physics. Rather than accepting this, he makes up a t

What a load of rubbish. I suspect that the author has a very highly opinion of his intelligence and failed Physics. Rather than accepting this, he makes up a tall tale about how the way Physics is taught is deliberately made to make people fail. I highly question the value if this link to Hacker News... I would downvote it if I could.

euroclydon 15y ago
I've personally experienced the set of circumstances he describes many times in school, so I don't think it's rubbish. In fact I switched from engineering to math specifically because I could better get by on raw intelligence rather than rote memorization or suffering through boring textbooks. I've heard that the value of a college degree to potential employers is as proof that a candidate can finish, follow through or endure, so many times now that I accept it as fact.
fmoralesc 15y ago
I think the tale's point isn't that the way physics is taught is deliberately made to make people fail, but that the failures it leads to are features, not bugs. I think he might have a point in that. The whole premise of the essay is that > Naturally intelligent people are quite worthless if they’re undisciplined. Someone who thinks so wouldn't have a very high opinion of his intelligence.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
tonyarkles 15y ago
I don't know if it's deliberate or not, but it seems to me that this is how a decent chunk of curricula have evolved. Although we do not know the actual background of the author, I can share my own anecdotes. Here's my background: I've got a B.Sc in Electrical Engineering, with a post-degree specialization in Computer Science (essentially, the compsci courses for a 4-year B.Sc, without all of the Arts electives). Yes, this means I passed Physics. Through high school, I did quite well based entirely on intelligence. I put very little effort into anything, kept an honour roll average the whole time, and partied hard at every opportunity. To be honest, I'm surprised I don't have brain damage, based on some of the stuff I did. I get to Engineering school and things start to change. Now, I'm nowhere near the top of my class. As I was used to in high school, I'd plan an hour to finish an assignment. I'd get nowhere. Just like the OP's story, I felt like I was running into brick walls all the time. Physics (statics, in particular), was a total disaster... At Christmas, I got my marks back and ended up with a 51% in Statics. Brutal. "How can this be? I'm smart! I'm the guy helping other people with their homework! This doesn't make sense." That's when I started to realize that hard work was the element I was missing. I turned down the partying a fair bit, and started to actually put time and effort into things. The following semester, 71% in Dynamics. Not a stellar mark, but a significant improvement. The biggest problem I had through my University career was that I had no problem putting time and effort into things that I was interested in, but courses that I wasn't overly fond of ended up in the mid-60% range. My transcript is a strange mixture of 90%+ marks and ~65% marks. Designing a simple CPU on an FGPA? Awesome! Let's do this! Sink hours and hours into it and end up with a 97% in the class, with a functional CPU coming out the other side. Calculating the torque in an electric motor? Fuck that. 60%. I don't think I ever really managed to get over the hump of "I can do well in any of these courses, if I put time and hard work into them".
- euroclydon 15y ago
  This is why it's important to remember who the college consumer is (you) and what the product you're buying is (not grades, but knowledge). Of course it's not that way for all. Many students are buying a diploma and/or access to certain networks of people. That's fine, but for the average state school attendee, they'd be far better off taking their time in college, not worrying about grades, and asking to take a course again for free if they didn't learn enough the first time.

euroclydon 15y ago

I've personally experienced the set of circumstances he describes many times in school, so I don't think it's rubbish. In fact I switched from engineering to math specifically because I could better get by on raw intelligence rather than rote memorization or suffering through boring textbooks. I've heard that the value of a college degree to potential employers is as proof that a candidate can finish, follow through or endure, so many times now that I accept it as fact.

fmoralesc 15y ago

I think the tale's point isn't that the way physics is taught is deliberately made to make people fail, but that the failures it leads to are features, not bugs. I think he might have a point in that. The whole premise of the essay is that > Naturally intelligent people are quite worthless if they’re undisciplined. Someone who thinks so wouldn't have a very high opinion of his intelligence.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

tonyarkles 15y ago

I don't know if it's deliberate or not, but it seems to me that this is how a decent chunk of curricula have evolved. Although we do not know the actual background of the author, I can share my own anecdotes. Here's my background: I've got a B.Sc in Electrical Engineering, with a post-degree specialization in Computer Science (essentially, the compsci courses for a 4-year B.Sc, without all of the Arts electives). Yes, this means I passed Physics. Through high school, I did quite well based entirely on intelligence. I put very little effort into anything, kept an honour roll average the whole time, and partied hard at every opportunity. To be honest, I'm surprised I don't have brain damage, based on some of the stuff I did. I get to Engineering school and things start to change. Now, I'm nowhere near the top of my class. As I was used to in high school, I'd plan an hour to finish an assignment. I'd get nowhere. Just like the OP's story, I felt like I was running into brick walls all the time. Physics (statics, in particular), was a total disaster... At Christmas, I got my marks back and ended up with a 51% in Statics. Brutal. "How can this be? I'm smart! I'm the guy helping other people with their homework! This doesn't make sense." That's when I started to realize that hard work was the element I was missing. I turned down the partying a fair bit, and started to actually put time and effort into things. The following semester, 71% in Dynamics. Not a stellar mark, but a significant improvement. The biggest problem I had through my University career was that I had no problem putting time and effort into things that I was interested in, but courses that I wasn't overly fond of ended up in the mid-60% range. My transcript is a strange mixture of 90%+ marks and ~65% marks. Designing a simple CPU on an FGPA? Awesome! Let's do this! Sink hours and hours into it and end up with a 97% in the class, with a functional CPU coming out the other side. Calculating the torque in an electric motor? Fuck that. 60%. I don't think I ever really managed to get over the hump of "I can do well in any of these courses, if I put time and hard work into them".

euroclydon 15y ago
This is why it's important to remember who the college consumer is (you) and what the product you're buying is (not grades, but knowledge). Of course it's not that way for all. Many students are buying a diploma and/or access to certain networks of people. That's fine, but for the average state school attendee, they'd be far better off taking their time in college, not worrying about grades, and asking to take a course again for free if they didn't learn enough the first time.